On 2/13/06, Bill Rushmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Derek E. Lewis wrote:
We may also define functional as how many apps each desktop environment
has. CDE or JDS both have file managers -- dtfile and Nautilus,
respectively; however, as everyone has said, CDE, itself,
CDE is faster. Much, much faster.
JDS has more functionality.
Neither is suitable for administration.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
To say JDS is more 'functional' than CDE is a somewhat vague, general
statement. If we define 'functional' as how easy it is to configure JDS
or CDE, then CDE certainly has some noteworthy characteristics, as you can
do *lot* with just vi and a [.]dt directory. The same cannot be said for
Derek E. Lewis wrote:
To say JDS is more 'functional' than CDE is a somewhat vague, general
statement. If we define 'functional' as how easy it is to configure
JDS or CDE, then CDE certainly has some noteworthy characteristics, as
you can do *lot* with just vi and a [.]dt directory. The same
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Derek E. Lewis wrote:
We may also define functional as how many apps each desktop environment
has. CDE or JDS both have file managers -- dtfile and Nautilus,
respectively; however, as everyone has said, CDE, itself, (meaning the
apps it has, etc.) is much faster than JDS,
On Monday 13 February 2006 12:46 am, UNIX admin wrote:
CDE is faster. Much, much faster.
JDS has more functionality.
Neither is suitable for administration.
And you point? (other than starting a flame war)
Who cares really, I use KDE.
I don't know what's wrong with JDS as far as
